What.
You pushed a huge patch onto git, with only a few hours of review
time. Notably, without any review or comments from Mark -- the
developer who first questioned the original commit.

I don't think that was unreasonable. This was correcting
an equally big patch which we all agreed was wrong, and
which was already in master. It was equivalent to reverting
the bad patch, but without destroying the good bits within
it. Both Carl and I had approved it.
The reprehensible behaviour was pushing the first big patch
without review, not the second.
Trevor